Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
GR No. 168464
I.
PARTIES:
PETITIONER:
ZENAIDA RAMOS-BALILIO
RESPONDENTS:
ROLANDO RAMOS
EUSEBIO I. RAMOS
EVANGELISTO GARCIA
II.
PRIOR PROCEEDINGS:
III.
IV.
OBJECTIVES
To have possession as well as to be recognized as rightful
owners of the land in question
V.
KEY FACTS
Petitioner Zenaida and her brother Alexander (now deceased) are the
children of spouses Susana Bueno and Abundio Ramos. The spouses started
occupying Lot No. 204 in 1938. Abundio died in 1944.
Susana met her second husband, respondent Eusebio Ramos in 1946, with
whom she had five children, one of whom is respondent Rolando.
ISSUE/S:
1. W/N the subject land is still a public domain
2. W/N the petitioner has better right over the land in question due to her
VIII.
Ratio Decidendi:
1. YES. Evidence shows that Zenaidas parent has not filed any homestead
patent. The decision of Bureau of Lands in 1958 only addressed Zenaidas
familys right of preference over the land, as to their possession and
cultivation. It bears stressing that the Bureau of Lands ordered the filing of an
appropriate application for its registration that indicates that as of that time
there is no valid application filed. So the purported between Zenaida and her
mother cannot be given effect, for reason that Susana cannot sell what does
not belong to her. Hence, nullifies the partition of the property among
Zenaida, Alexander and Rolando and his siblings because Zenaida could not
dispose the land she does not own, so as Eusebio and Rolando cannot claim
any right whatsoever as heirs of Susana. Thus, the land in question remains
to be part of public domain and belong to the State.
2. YES. Zenaida has proven prior possession of the portion of land she claims
as her share, which possession antedates the filing of the homestead
application. She produced evidence showing that she has filed a verified
application for the registration of the land with the Bureau of Lands on August
10, 1971 which is still pending. The documents remain uncontested and the
application has not been assailed by any of the parties to the case. She
alleged that during the lifetime of her mother, she and her maternal
grandfather cultivated and occupied the land. Moreover, Zenaida presented
tax declarations both in her name and that of her predecessor-in-interest
(mother Susana Bueno) covering the property. As held from previous cases,
that although tax declarations or realty tax payments of property are not
conclusive evidence of ownership, nevertheless, they are good indicia of
possession in the concept of owner for no one in his right mind would be
paying taxes for a property that is not in his actual or at least constructive
possession. They constitute at least proof that the holder has a claim of title
over the property. The voluntary declaration of a piece of property for taxation
purposes manifests not only ones sincere and honest desire to obtain title to
the property and announces his adverse claim against the State and all other
interested parties, but also the intention to contribute needed revenues to the
Government. Hence, petitioner Zenaidas uncontested and verified application
for a homestead patent coupled with her open and notorious occupation of
the land convinces us of her preferential right to possess the land claimed,
which entitles her to be protected by the law in such possession.
IX.
DISPOSITION: